Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Koppen's climate classification is based on vegetation, what exactly are the categories in which the climate divides the vegetation? Something like deciduous trees, conifers etc. For example, the Dfa and Cfa line doesn't really seem to match up with a particularly strong change in vegetation.
Is NYC's "native" vegetation that much different from Chicago's?
If you mapped out the Koppen climate classification over that of many kinds of trees and plants, would you see a large change-over in the species present at the boundaries?
I thought there's a noticeable vegetation change around North Carolina. There's another noticeable change in tree types from downstate to upstate NY, and by the time you're in the Adirondacks or Northern New England the vegetation type is rather different.
I guess the change you're referring to in northern New England is roughly the point when the more boreal-like evergreen trees such as spruces start to become common (mixed in with deciduous trees like birch and maple), and by the time you get to downstate NY and southward, I also notice the vegetation is lusher, almost all dominated by broadleaf decidous trees.
I guess I'm having a hard time pinpointing and visualizing in scenery exactly what the vegetation change between the Dfa and Dfb is supposed to match by Koppen's ideas on vegetation.
It has a climate that resembles aspects of the southern cities like Orlando but also resembles it's northern neighbors like DC.
DC, Philly and NYC have a very different feel than places like Wilmington, Myrtle Beach, and Charleston when it comes to climate outside of the summer months.
I agree you. I too consider Virginia Beach to be near the
northern edge of subtropical climate.
I'm amazed that the Koppen classification is still the gold standard,
even with substantial tweaking by Trewartha/etc
He certainly was a genius for his day but that was a LONG time ago.
Koppen lived from 1846 to 1940 (a long life...imagine the changes he witnessed from mid 19th century to World War 2)
He started working on his classification system back in the 1880's.
No computers to help back then, LOL
Very limited data to work with too, I bet. I wonder how much worldwide data was available or did he have to do a lot of guess work?
He did a good job but definite flaws that over 100 years later really
should have been resolved by now.
Also wonder how well traveled he was? Did he ever actually visit other
continents, like for example, North America? Long distance travel wasn't easy back then, very slow, mostly by ocean liner.
Would have been an eye opener for him for sure. To experience subtropical NYC, 100 years ago
On the east coast because of less continentality, the area occupied by Dfa is very small, so the switch is kinda meaningless. If your boundary for C / D climates is the -3°C isotherm, it's a quick switch from a C to D climate with no change (in fact, there a few tiny spots with Cfb right on the coast but the vegetation change is meaningless).
In Western Massachusetts and Upstate NY, the most common tree types are maple and birch with few oaks. By NYC/ Long Island, oak and hickory is the most forest and the same is true southward till about somewhere in southern Virginia when the vegetation becomes more southern. I think Long Island is close to a boundary line for growing plants.
I guess the change you're referring to in northern New England is roughly the point when the more boreal-like evergreen trees such as spruces start to become common (mixed in with deciduous trees like birch and maple), and by the time you get to downstate NY and southward, I also notice the vegetation is lusher, almost all dominated by broadleaf decidous trees.
I guess I'm having a hard time pinpointing and visualizing in scenery exactly what the vegetation change between the Dfa and Dfb is supposed to match by Koppen's ideas on vegetation.
Stumbler, the change between Dfa and Dfb is right in your neck of the woods (no pun intended)
It's a lighter shade of blue on the map.
The northern limit of "Carolinian" broadleaf deciduous is in Southern Ontario. Specifically the Golden Horseshoe area. Travel north or east from Toronto you transition into mixed Broadleaf/coniferious "St Lawrence lowlands" forest.
Ottawa, Montreal, up to Quebec City.
Carolinian Forest sounds more "exotic" than it is.
If you look closely at forested areas of SW Ontario you will see
various trees not found anywhere else in Canada.
Like... Shagbark Hickory, Kentucky Coffee Tree, etc
Carolinian Forest sounds more "exotic" than it is.
If you look closely at forested areas of SW Ontario you will see
various trees not found anywhere else in Canada.
Like... Shagbark Hickory, Kentucky Coffee Tree, etc
The wording "Carolinian forest" sounds familiar to me, probably from park information guides. I recognize the names of those trees and have an idea of what they look like, though I probably couldn't tell right off the bat.
I guess though since much of southern Ontario is probably cleared for agricultural land so what's the natural vegetation from original forests might not make up a lot of it.
Another thing I found interesting was that possums are in Toronto and reach their northern limit around there/southern Ontario (though I think they might have only reached there recently from the US and survived to establish populations). I usually associate possums with the southern US.
Last edited by Stumbler.; 02-03-2012 at 06:10 PM..
I'm amazed that the Koppen classification is still the gold standard,
even with substantial tweaking by Trewartha/etc
He certainly was a genius for his day but that was a LONG time ago.
Koppen lived from 1846 to 1940 (a long life...imagine the changes he witnessed from mid 19th century to World War 2)
He started working on his classification system back in the 1880's.
No computers to help back then, LOL
Very limited data to work with too, I bet. I wonder how much worldwide data was available or did he have to do a lot of guess work?
He did a good job but definite flaws that over 100 years later really
should have been resolved by now.
Also wonder how well traveled he was? Did he ever actually visit other
continents, like for example, North America? Long distance travel wasn't easy back then, very slow, mostly by ocean liner.
Would have been an eye opener for him for sure. To experience subtropical NYC, 100 years ago;)
That’s what I’ve stressed many times, Koppen was the father of modern climate classification, but he had limited resources compared to what we had even back in the 1950’s. When Trewartha did his regrouping back in 1968 – he had a lot more tools at his dispossal – including that air travel was much more common in 1965 than in the 1890’s when Koppen devised his system. I don’t know for sure- but I agree, I tend to doubt that Koppen was ever in North or even South America.
We don’t realize what we have at our finger tips with this computer in terms of the abilty to get data…
if nyc is considered subtropicalwhy isnt windsor ontario they have the same climate it mostly snows in the winter unlike other places such as atlanta where it rains
if nyc is considered subtropicalwhy isnt windsor ontario they have the same climate it mostly snows in the winter unlike other places such as atlanta where it rains
Windsor and NYC do NOT have the same climate... NYC is much warmer year round.
The two climates are markedly different. In the coldest month Windsor averages 23.9 F whereas New York averages 33 F, which is quite a difference right there. Both get significant snow, but that is far from the only criterion. Also the dominant precipitation type in an average winter in NYC is rain, not snow, and the snow usually melts instead of sticking around. The clincher for climates is whether on average a city is able to maintain a persistent snowpack; in other words, is there on average snow on the ground in the coldest month? This neatly falls at the 26.6 F (converted from -3C) line; warmer, you do not have snowpack on average, colder, you do. New York City spectacularly fails this test, whereas Windsor securely passes it. This has profound effects on the animals and vegetation in an area, not to mention the people that live there.
So to say New York and Windsor have the same climate is nonsense; among many other things there is quite a difference between on average having all of your snow melt leaving bare ground and retaining snow cover during the Winter, even if you do have some melting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
